Hate your sig. Nothing like insulting those people who enabled you to do just about everything you do in your life to give you a bullshit ego boost. Insulting teachers is the lowest form of shit. I'm not a teacher myself, but both of my parents are. Teachers put up with this kind of shit all the time from people like you and they still choose to deal with your bratty children for little pay and don't complain when people say callous, bullshit stuff like that. Teachers have more required continuing education than lawyers and doctors, yet we still treat them as almost-professionals instead of professionals. You and your ilk are the problem with the American education system- it's kind of hard to want to bust your ass for a public that is openly contemptuous of your desire to serve them. Of course, if teachers had done a better job with you, perhaps you wouldn't be so ignorant. Those who can't teach, bitch about teachers.
All the discussion of trolls pisses me off. Slashdot works well because it's anti-censorship- you have to have that to have a real discussion community. With that in mind, if you read comments at +2, you'll pretty much get rid of all the trolls and flame wars. Slashdot is what YOU make it. If you don't like trolls, you browse at +2. Just my 2 cents.
You're absolutely right about the nature of American democracy in many cases- the last two US Presidential elections have proven that much; however, there are currents of change. Howard Dean, the Democratic National Chairman has moved the party away from their former big-donor focus to a focus on small donors; the Dems are behind in fundraising, but their fundraising comes from a more anonymous source that doesn't ask for the kind of access that the corporations do (basically, you give $25 bucks to a candidate, you don't expect any benefits from it). As a result, you might see some shifting in priorities amongst the Democrats-they now are beholden to individual Americans in many ways they have not in the past. Just my 2 cents... James Hare
But it's the "you must have knowledge" attitude that keeps people out of open source and sticking with Microsoft. I remember my early days in the Linux wilderness, seraching in vain for the stuff that would let me do anything fun/useful with this desktop operating system I'd spent months just getting working. Everywhere I looked were imprecations against noobies or people who didn't know everything about their systems. I'd go to help forums and it seemed like the only help that was being offered was sarcasm and RTFM. Sadly, it hasn't gotten much better. The linux/OSS world has become more and more fragmented (why do we have multiple packaging systems? WHY?) and more and more insular. We fight amongst ourselves about which UNIX-like operating system is better- I'm sorry- that's the dumbest argument I've ever heard. BSD can be just as insecure as Linux if you set it up that way. Linux can be just as secure as BSD if you set it up that way. WHO CARES! We're all going to disagree. If we were the kind of people who got along well with others, we wouldn't be playing at slashdot. For pete's sake- let's stop the flame war and get to making better software. But then slashdot would no longer have a reason to be. And there would be much rejoicing. James
I think you've hit on one thing, and Apple's already got a good partner for this- They've been playing very nicely with HP. If they keep their current deal with HP intact and build on some systems building (I'm thinking the mini), they could really increase their market share quickly. Honestly, I love this whole story because I'm hoping Apple will realize they've got an opportunity here to start the all out OS war we've needed to have for years. If you don't believe that- how much innovation has occured over at Microsoft since Win 2k? Hell, the version number of XP makes it pretty darn clear. Microsoft certainly doesn't see enough threats around to seriously develop their software, which while it's allowed them to make windows more secure, hasn't pushed them to work on some of the things Apple does better (less feature bloat, better memory handling). I dunno. I'm just tired of seeing both major OS makers sit back and release incremental upgrades every year or so and collect mad cash for doing next to nothing. A real knock-down, drag-out fight for the souls of x86 pcs is just what the computing industry needs. At least, I think so. james
Google is a company in the United States; as such, when rolling out a new service like this that requires trucks to go around a city, it is more feasible to do it in your own country, where you don't have to pay for the transportation of large equipment. Google does alot of things, but wasting money isn't one of them. They'll get their features ready for the rest of the world as quickly as they can, and not a second faster.
When i was a sophomore in college, I discovered (completely by chance) that my college's email server was using non-shadowed password files. I did the requiste steps and showed security personnell the problem. Six months later I was kicked out of the RTA program (tech support guys in the dorms) and 3 months after that I was kicked out of school..edu is not serious about security. They're just about keeping their jobs. All I ever saw from our campus IT people was excuses- their internet didn't run enough because students were running AIM too much, not because they built an inadequate network. IT at a college is the dregs of the IT degree world. You or I know more than the average director of IT at a college (hint: he doesn't read slashdot. Really, our colleges should have the best computer people, not the dregs. Unfortunately, that's a job for the legislature, which means it won't get done. oh wel.
It's been awhile since I posted, but this post bothered me. If you expect slashdot to be good, you have to give to it. I've never had mod privileges, and I've always wanted to, if for no other reason but to mod down posts like your own. You aren't helping with this- you're just being like Tucker Carlson- talking a bunch of noise without doing anything. If you want better quality in the site and comments, use your moderation points. If I had I certainly would. Otherwise, you're just talking noise. Talking noise does no good. Slashdot is what WE make it; nothing more, nothing less. So do something. Don't just talk. My two cents.
And that's the price of representative democracy; however, the recent war over intellectual property shows an important crux point in our current government/governed relationship. The RIAA and MPAA are organizations of intellectual property holders that are using their influence to force out new technologies. In this way, they are acting much like a trust would act. After the recent anti-trust action against Micrsoft, I wonder when action hasn't at least beent tried against these industries. The music industry has already been found guilty of price fixing. Does the DOJ or any other organization have plans to take the MPAA or RIAA to court for their blatant violations of US antitrust law? Thanks, James Hare
Interestingly enough, this idea could work if it relied on a two-tier structure. Using existing fiber-optic lines, gaps between communities could be bridged. The government, through taxes, would be able to maintain the fiber and switching architecture. Each city would build a wireless "cloud" like in that city in Georgia (previous/. article- search for it). Wireless devices would have a one-time tax, such as the sales and use tax on automobiles in some states. This additional tax would go into a fund that would be added to tax dollars (interestingly enough, if a large number of users were connected at one time, this tax would create a large amount of revenue to upgrade systems if necessary). Land line connections could still be available for situations where more bandwith was needed, but the 54 mb/s of 802.11g would be more than adequate for most people's needs. The only problem with that, is what do we do with all the telcom workers and the repairmen on the telephone poles? What about the wireless phone companies? While corporations may seem unnecessary, under the current system they do fill an important task: providing jobs for skilled laborers. My uncle works for Verizon, and he's made a good living doing so. If the cables were to fall tomorrow and this wireless revolution to happen, he would lose his job-the unions and corporations would finally fight together against something like that... I don't think any wins are possible with something like this.
I don't think it's fair to say that all science/engineering/math people are held to higher standard. Different standard, definetly. Subjectivity means we have to do things a little differently because there isn't necessarily a "right" answer. More often than not, it's how you express yourself and whether your opinion has any merit whatsoever. As a result, it may seem less rigorous than the "right or wrong" nature of the sciences, but at higher levels it all comes down to original, creative thought. If Science were really limited, as schools conventionally teach in lower-level courses, to "right and wrong" the earth would still be flat, the center of the universe and 6000 years old. These ideas fell by the wayside becuase scientist did the subjective thing of coming up with an opinion and subjecting it to empirical tests. When you're talking about English, History or other subjects, empirical testing is difficult. Instead, we hone our skills in making sure our opinions are separate from our biases, personal assumptions and problems. It is through that process that we come to appreciate academic rigor. While it may seem easier or less important, it is none of that. It's just different, and should be held as that before ridiculed.
While ping itself is a useful tool, it's difficult for me to understand why the vast majority of users need it so bad that it should be installed as a default TCP/IP tool. First of all, it's a commandline tool, which means most users are scared of it. Second of all, it's not useful for searching for pr0n or sending email, so the vast majority don't know it exists. Maybe we should start paying more attention to things like that. If people aren't smart enough to secure their computer, deny them tools that would damage other people's computers.
My point wasn't that their actual tactics were sophisticated; by definition a DDOS attack isn't particularly sophisticated. It's brute force... The sophistication was in stopping the attack quickly enough to elude law enforcement; most script kiddies are looking as much for people to notice as to cause havok. This seemed to be based on more than just "mommy and daddy don't pay attention to me" syndrome.
As email viruses expanded from an original concept, their authors began to adapt to the strategies used both to catch them and to deal with their creations. As a result, newer viruses have been more damaging. The October attacks showed a greater level of sophistication solely because the people behind these types of attacks are aware of what's going on and pay attention in order to make them more successful. The scary part is that the longer people like this are able to elude law enforcement, the larger their attacks will eventually become. Each one is, in essence, a trial run for the next larger attack. Watching attacks like the ones that have plagued dal.net for a long time, it's easy to see how these attacks could end up causing serious problems (beyond the minor inconvenience of not being able to get to your favorite sites) in the near future.
Two things; first of all, to the/. moderators. These forums turn into discussion very often; whether or not that is their intent, that discussion is both important and on-topic (at least as long as it refers to something within the thread you're dealing with). Moderation should be applied in as laissez-faire a way as humanly possible in order to allow that discussion. Now any rant against Microsoft will of course generate alot of discussion, but that does not mean that discussion that doesn't deal with Linux's advantages, Microsoft's monopoly or the injustice of the capitalist system are completely off-topic. The topic is what/. users make most of the time. I've seen discussions take very interesting tangents when/. users are allowed to branch out into surrounding topics or respond to each other sigs. The problem is that these discussions usually only take place in topics less visited by other users because they are not moderated as much. My second point is in addition to the points raised by the author of the thread above. Equating any pro-palestinian agenda to terrorism is wrong. Equating anything other than acceptance of Israel's line as anti-semitism is also wrong. For too long this nation (the United States) has been afraid of challenging Israeli responses to Palestinian actions. If what the Palestinian people are involved in is terrorism, then our nation was founded on terrorism. The Palestinians are waging a battle against a militarily superior power that has taken their land from them by force, forced them into refugee camps and taken away whatever liberties they had to begin with. If we really believe in freedom in the US (and many of our government's acts call that into question) we must take a stand for the Palestinians that will guarantee them something more than a "provisional" state. The first step to a real solution to the middle east crisis begins there. When we're no longer seen as the support of the Israeli war machine, it will become more difficult for the despots of that region to paint the United States as an evil tyrant. As the eyes of their people become focused on internal problems rather than external aggresion, they will demand changes and most likely get them. The United States has not realized the most important lesson of the imperial ambitions of Europe: the hand you beat down finds ways to hit you back.
The RIAA shouldn't be as involved in legislation as it is to begin with. Corporations and big money have hijacked our representatives and destroyed our democracy. If script kiddies at least try to take one back for team normal guy, then they oughta be given some credit. No, it's not necessarily right. No, it's not a clean solution, but they've gone as far as they can to deny us any other way. If you can't use the courts, the Congress or anything else to try and beat these corporate thugs, then at least make em hurt. Before you say that hasn't been tried, the founders of Napster went to the courts and the Congress to try and establish some sort of licensing scheme that would allow people to trade music online for a fee. Instead of allowing this, the RIAA fought as hard as they could and stifled innovation to the detriment of consumers and artists alike. The RIAA is not interested in protecting copyrights; they're interested in protecting the control of artists that reliance on physical media grants the record industry. They are interested in nothing else.
It's called civil disobedience. Supported by Ghandi, Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King, Jr. to name a few. If a law is TRULY unjust, then you are within your rights to break it in order to demonstrate its unjust nature. Not only that, but the American courts demand that actual harm be shown in order to initiate a lawsuit. To get an unjust law thrown out, you must break that law and be punished or face the threat of punishment. Just my $.02.
That companies that operate in the United States are helping foreign governments to censor their citizen's internet access. Not only are they working counter to the stated purposes of the United States government, but they're working to instill the kind of xenophobia and insular thinking that have led to the current generation of terrorist leaders. I, for one, am glad to know that my tax dollars support a company like N2H2 that is doing it's best to keep countries like Saudi Arabia from being accountable to their citizens by helping to filter REAL news away from those citizens. Any country that wants to filter the Internet (an on-demand communications tool at its core) has something it wishes to hide from those citizens. If the United States is truly as supportive of open and transparent government as we say we are (and I'm guardedly optimistic about our commitment) we would press criminal charges against companies that comport themselves in this manner.
Unless, of course, you and a bunch of your buddies (from the fifty states) either petition the government for redress of grievances (provided for in the constitution) or organize a constitutional convention (also provided for). The rules are, like most other things in the constitution, left vague, but citizens can practice issue/constitutional advocacy on their own. Whether or not the government would recognize these types of actions as legitimate is up for grabs; if enough people were involved it would make political sense to pay attention; however, if enough people were that fed up, it would already have been dealt with by congress. Right now, our only way to really get issues decided as the people want them is to get on TV somehow, piss a whole lot of people off and in doing so, get congress involved. If it's against corporate interests, that may not even be enough.
So what's that all mean? Democracy, as we think we know it in the US, is a joke. That much was proved by the wonderful election of 2000. If an honest accounting of the votes can be stopped by an appointed judicial panel (who are completely unaccountable, especially since the serve life terms), then we're not living in any type of democracy. Corporate control of representative bodies also shows us what's really going on. On top of that Herr Ashcroft and Mein Fuhrer Bush are doing the best they can to dismantle whatever protections the Constitution had for our personal liberties. Frankly, I'm not too impressed with anything the US does anymore. We can't even keep our constitution sacred, so all our high-minded principles pretty much mean turd anyways.
Worst part is, I love America and everything it stands for. I just detest this country, because evil men have ruined what was great about it.
To change a law in the court system, a person must demonstrate actual harm; that is, unnecessary or unconstitutional government action necessary to apply a law. To change it in the legislature, one must have millions of dollars, strong connections to established corporations and industries, and possibly dirt on one or more senators/congressmen. For the average guy, changing the law is either impossible or so difficult as to be for all intents and purposes impossible. Any more questions about our fscked up system over here?
One atrocity committed by the American government... Hmm... It's hard to pick just one. How about only those that most people here will remember well (at least from history, considering primacy effects and all that). How about Dresden (firebombing innocent civilians en masse, killing more than Hiroshima or Nagasaki) or hell; how bout Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How about the internment of people of Japanese origin? While I appreciate your cunningly crafted troll (considering this IS slashdot, and most of us seem to have it in the for the US gov't), I can't just sit idly by. The United States has committed plenty of atrocities, especially against the Native Americans (our westward expansion could easily be labeled "ethnic cleansing") and this sort of revisionist history is really damaging. Okay. Enough lookin like an idiot answering trolls for now.
I used to go to slashdot to get information that wasn't available elsewhere; I don't if it's just because today is a slow tech news day or whatever, but posting stuff that's been on CNN or MSNBC's webpage for so long they no longer keep it on the front page doesn't make slashdot look very important. Why copy their stories? There's gotta be better content out there.
that quote you referenced in it's entirety is: "They that can give up essential liberties to obtain a little temporal safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"
~Benjamin Franklin *just thought I'd give it up; a great counter to the whole "the constitution is not a suicide pact" argument offered by our anti-personal liberties gov't.
I was a Mac user until my 18th birthday. As a result, I had never installed a card/processor/anything in my box. When I got my PC, I immediately took a look and thought "gee, that'd be easy to build." Within a year I built my own PC. Ikea furniture, on the other hand, still eludes me at times. On the whole, computer components these days are pretty user-friendly; however, the assumption that installing memory/processors/upgrade cards protects an industry not unlike the auto repair business; unskilled jobs for people who don't mind doing repetitive, boring tasks that generally are not clean or safe and most definetly do not involve a desk. Go to your local Best Buy, and they'll do all the work on your computer for you, charging exboritant rates for work done by a technician paid a little more than minimum wage. The company gets a huge profit, the user continues to feel incapable of working on their computer, and a new industry is created. If everybody built their computer at home, this whole thing wouldn't be possible. Home-built may be best, but it's only best when everyone understands the technology. The interesting thing about the information age is it's the first age in human technology where the vast majority of the technology consuming public has NO understanding of the technology they use. As a result, service industries like mechanics and computer technicians form an important part of our economy. I don't know whether we should arrest this trend or not; on one hand, it promises high-paying jobs and status upon those who understand the technology; but on the other hand, it limits innovation only to those who are in the know. In the case of the internal combustion engine, we should be able to see (from the lack of design progress over the last 100 years) that this type of thing leads to stagnation. The computing revolution shouldn't be leaving so many people out, but instead of including the general public, the comupting people (/. included) has left the general public out. The masses at the gates need to know more, if for any reason, then because they'll support open source more fully if they REALLY understand why it is a better solution. If we leave the masses at the gate, they'll eventually become disinterested and treat computers like they do their cars. I don't want to see what that kind of lack of interest will do to our information technology systems; the roads are bad enough that the very prospect is horrifying. If you think I'm wrong realize that the best plans and projections helped design the roads in the United States, and even with that information available, the roads suck. Without an informed, interested Internet public, we'll see the same kinds of problems cropping up again. But, of course, this is all conjecture. If anybody is interested, of course let me know what you think.
The problem is that belief in a monetary reward has become the prime reason for scientific progres, and that's just crazy. Money is not and has never been real; however, because a government many of us do not trust (for good reason in some cases) says that money has value we accept it like sheep. I'm a college student, and I realize how challenging some courses can be, but just because I've spent 4 years learning doesn't mean I have an intrinsic right to a better life than anyone else; however, our "classless" society will pretty much guarantee that for me. The main problem is that we've suborned the PRINCIPLE of doing the right thing for the alimghty buck. Remember this; the largest portion of human existence was egalitarian society where bands of humans lived together and helped each other for mutual survival. It's in our nature to look after each other, so why can't we just do it?
Slashdot Mirror
Hate your sig. Nothing like insulting those people who enabled you to do just about everything you do in your life to give you a bullshit ego boost. Insulting teachers is the lowest form of shit. I'm not a teacher myself, but both of my parents are. Teachers put up with this kind of shit all the time from people like you and they still choose to deal with your bratty children for little pay and don't complain when people say callous, bullshit stuff like that. Teachers have more required continuing education than lawyers and doctors, yet we still treat them as almost-professionals instead of professionals. You and your ilk are the problem with the American education system- it's kind of hard to want to bust your ass for a public that is openly contemptuous of your desire to serve them.
Of course, if teachers had done a better job with you, perhaps you wouldn't be so ignorant.
Those who can't teach, bitch about teachers.
All the discussion of trolls pisses me off. Slashdot works well because it's anti-censorship- you have to have that to have a real discussion community. With that in mind, if you read comments at +2, you'll pretty much get rid of all the trolls and flame wars. Slashdot is what YOU make it. If you don't like trolls, you browse at +2.
Just my 2 cents.
You're absolutely right about the nature of American democracy in many cases- the last two US Presidential elections have proven that much; however, there are currents of change. Howard Dean, the Democratic National Chairman has moved the party away from their former big-donor focus to a focus on small donors; the Dems are behind in fundraising, but their fundraising comes from a more anonymous source that doesn't ask for the kind of access that the corporations do (basically, you give $25 bucks to a candidate, you don't expect any benefits from it). As a result, you might see some shifting in priorities amongst the Democrats-they now are beholden to individual Americans in many ways they have not in the past.
Just my 2 cents...
James Hare
But it's the "you must have knowledge" attitude that keeps people out of open source and sticking with Microsoft. I remember my early days in the Linux wilderness, seraching in vain for the stuff that would let me do anything fun/useful with this desktop operating system I'd spent months just getting working. Everywhere I looked were imprecations against noobies or people who didn't know everything about their systems. I'd go to help forums and it seemed like the only help that was being offered was sarcasm and RTFM. Sadly, it hasn't gotten much better. The linux/OSS world has become more and more fragmented (why do we have multiple packaging systems? WHY?) and more and more insular. We fight amongst ourselves about which UNIX-like operating system is better- I'm sorry- that's the dumbest argument I've ever heard. BSD can be just as insecure as Linux if you set it up that way. Linux can be just as secure as BSD if you set it up that way. WHO CARES! We're all going to disagree. If we were the kind of people who got along well with others, we wouldn't be playing at slashdot. For pete's sake- let's stop the flame war and get to making better software.
But then slashdot would no longer have a reason to be. And there would be much rejoicing.
James
I think you've hit on one thing, and Apple's already got a good partner for this- They've been playing very nicely with HP. If they keep their current deal with HP intact and build on some systems building (I'm thinking the mini), they could really increase their market share quickly. Honestly, I love this whole story because I'm hoping Apple will realize they've got an opportunity here to start the all out OS war we've needed to have for years. If you don't believe that- how much innovation has occured over at Microsoft since Win 2k? Hell, the version number of XP makes it pretty darn clear. Microsoft certainly doesn't see enough threats around to seriously develop their software, which while it's allowed them to make windows more secure, hasn't pushed them to work on some of the things Apple does better (less feature bloat, better memory handling). I dunno. I'm just tired of seeing both major OS makers sit back and release incremental upgrades every year or so and collect mad cash for doing next to nothing. A real knock-down, drag-out fight for the souls of x86 pcs is just what the computing industry needs.
At least, I think so.
james
Google is a company in the United States; as such, when rolling out a new service like this that requires trucks to go around a city, it is more feasible to do it in your own country, where you don't have to pay for the transportation of large equipment. Google does alot of things, but wasting money isn't one of them. They'll get their features ready for the rest of the world as quickly as they can, and not a second faster.
When i was a sophomore in college, I discovered (completely by chance) that my college's email server was using non-shadowed password files. I did the requiste steps and showed security personnell the problem. Six months later I was kicked out of the RTA program (tech support guys in the dorms) and 3 months after that I was kicked out of school. .edu is not serious about security. They're just about keeping their jobs. All I ever saw from our campus IT people was excuses- their internet didn't run enough because students were running AIM too much, not because they built an inadequate network. IT at a college is the dregs of the IT degree world. You or I know more than the average director of IT at a college (hint: he doesn't read slashdot. Really, our colleges should have the best computer people, not the dregs. Unfortunately, that's a job for the legislature, which means it won't get done. oh wel.
It's been awhile since I posted, but this post bothered me. If you expect slashdot to be good, you have to give to it. I've never had mod privileges, and I've always wanted to, if for no other reason but to mod down posts like your own. You aren't helping with this- you're just being like Tucker Carlson- talking a bunch of noise without doing anything. If you want better quality in the site and comments, use your moderation points. If I had I certainly would. Otherwise, you're just talking noise. Talking noise does no good. Slashdot is what WE make it; nothing more, nothing less.
So do something. Don't just talk.
My two cents.
And that's the price of representative democracy; however, the recent war over intellectual property shows an important crux point in our current government/governed relationship. The RIAA and MPAA are organizations of intellectual property holders that are using their influence to force out new technologies. In this way, they are acting much like a trust would act. After the recent anti-trust action against Micrsoft, I wonder when action hasn't at least beent tried against these industries. The music industry has already been found guilty of price fixing. Does the DOJ or any other organization have plans to take the MPAA or RIAA to court for their blatant violations of US antitrust law?
Thanks,
James Hare
Interestingly enough, this idea could work if it relied on a two-tier structure. Using existing fiber-optic lines, gaps between communities could be bridged. The government, through taxes, would be able to maintain the fiber and switching architecture. Each city would build a wireless "cloud" like in that city in Georgia (previous /. article- search for it). Wireless devices would have a one-time tax, such as the sales and use tax on automobiles in some states. This additional tax would go into a fund that would be added to tax dollars (interestingly enough, if a large number of users were connected at one time, this tax would create a large amount of revenue to upgrade systems if necessary). Land line connections could still be available for situations where more bandwith was needed, but the 54 mb/s of 802.11g would be more than adequate for most people's needs.
The only problem with that, is what do we do with all the telcom workers and the repairmen on the telephone poles? What about the wireless phone companies? While corporations may seem unnecessary, under the current system they do fill an important task: providing jobs for skilled laborers. My uncle works for Verizon, and he's made a good living doing so. If the cables were to fall tomorrow and this wireless revolution to happen, he would lose his job-the unions and corporations would finally fight together against something like that... I don't think any wins are possible with something like this.
I don't think it's fair to say that all science/engineering/math people are held to higher standard. Different standard, definetly. Subjectivity means we have to do things a little differently because there isn't necessarily a "right" answer. More often than not, it's how you express yourself and whether your opinion has any merit whatsoever. As a result, it may seem less rigorous than the "right or wrong" nature of the sciences, but at higher levels it all comes down to original, creative thought. If Science were really limited, as schools conventionally teach in lower-level courses, to "right and wrong" the earth would still be flat, the center of the universe and 6000 years old. These ideas fell by the wayside becuase scientist did the subjective thing of coming up with an opinion and subjecting it to empirical tests. When you're talking about English, History or other subjects, empirical testing is difficult. Instead, we hone our skills in making sure our opinions are separate from our biases, personal assumptions and problems. It is through that process that we come to appreciate academic rigor. While it may seem easier or less important, it is none of that. It's just different, and should be held as that before ridiculed.
While ping itself is a useful tool, it's difficult for me to understand why the vast majority of users need it so bad that it should be installed as a default TCP/IP tool. First of all, it's a commandline tool, which means most users are scared of it. Second of all, it's not useful for searching for pr0n or sending email, so the vast majority don't know it exists. Maybe we should start paying more attention to things like that. If people aren't smart enough to secure their computer, deny them tools that would damage other people's computers.
My point wasn't that their actual tactics were sophisticated; by definition a DDOS attack isn't particularly sophisticated. It's brute force... The sophistication was in stopping the attack quickly enough to elude law enforcement; most script kiddies are looking as much for people to notice as to cause havok. This seemed to be based on more than just "mommy and daddy don't pay attention to me" syndrome.
As email viruses expanded from an original concept, their authors began to adapt to the strategies used both to catch them and to deal with their creations. As a result, newer viruses have been more damaging. The October attacks showed a greater level of sophistication solely because the people behind these types of attacks are aware of what's going on and pay attention in order to make them more successful. The scary part is that the longer people like this are able to elude law enforcement, the larger their attacks will eventually become. Each one is, in essence, a trial run for the next larger attack. Watching attacks like the ones that have plagued dal.net for a long time, it's easy to see how these attacks could end up causing serious problems (beyond the minor inconvenience of not being able to get to your favorite sites) in the near future.
Two things; first of all, to the /. moderators. These forums turn into discussion very often; whether or not that is their intent, that discussion is both important and on-topic (at least as long as it refers to something within the thread you're dealing with). Moderation should be applied in as laissez-faire a way as humanly possible in order to allow that discussion. Now any rant against Microsoft will of course generate alot of discussion, but that does not mean that discussion that doesn't deal with Linux's advantages, Microsoft's monopoly or the injustice of the capitalist system are completely off-topic. The topic is what /. users make most of the time. I've seen discussions take very interesting tangents when /. users are allowed to branch out into surrounding topics or respond to each other sigs. The problem is that these discussions usually only take place in topics less visited by other users because they are not moderated as much.
My second point is in addition to the points raised by the author of the thread above. Equating any pro-palestinian agenda to terrorism is wrong. Equating anything other than acceptance of Israel's line as anti-semitism is also wrong. For too long this nation (the United States) has been afraid of challenging Israeli responses to Palestinian actions. If what the Palestinian people are involved in is terrorism, then our nation was founded on terrorism. The Palestinians are waging a battle against a militarily superior power that has taken their land from them by force, forced them into refugee camps and taken away whatever liberties they had to begin with. If we really believe in freedom in the US (and many of our government's acts call that into question) we must take a stand for the Palestinians that will guarantee them something more than a "provisional" state. The first step to a real solution to the middle east crisis begins there. When we're no longer seen as the support of the Israeli war machine, it will become more difficult for the despots of that region to paint the United States as an evil tyrant. As the eyes of their people become focused on internal problems rather than external aggresion, they will demand changes and most likely get them. The United States has not realized the most important lesson of the imperial ambitions of Europe: the hand you beat down finds ways to hit you back.
The RIAA shouldn't be as involved in legislation as it is to begin with. Corporations and big money have hijacked our representatives and destroyed our democracy. If script kiddies at least try to take one back for team normal guy, then they oughta be given some credit. No, it's not necessarily right. No, it's not a clean solution, but they've gone as far as they can to deny us any other way. If you can't use the courts, the Congress or anything else to try and beat these corporate thugs, then at least make em hurt. Before you say that hasn't been tried, the founders of Napster went to the courts and the Congress to try and establish some sort of licensing scheme that would allow people to trade music online for a fee. Instead of allowing this, the RIAA fought as hard as they could and stifled innovation to the detriment of consumers and artists alike. The RIAA is not interested in protecting copyrights; they're interested in protecting the control of artists that reliance on physical media grants the record industry. They are interested in nothing else.
It's called civil disobedience. Supported by Ghandi, Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King, Jr. to name a few. If a law is TRULY unjust, then you are within your rights to break it in order to demonstrate its unjust nature. Not only that, but the American courts demand that actual harm be shown in order to initiate a lawsuit. To get an unjust law thrown out, you must break that law and be punished or face the threat of punishment. Just my $.02.
That companies that operate in the United States are helping foreign governments to censor their citizen's internet access. Not only are they working counter to the stated purposes of the United States government, but they're working to instill the kind of xenophobia and insular thinking that have led to the current generation of terrorist leaders. I, for one, am glad to know that my tax dollars support a company like N2H2 that is doing it's best to keep countries like Saudi Arabia from being accountable to their citizens by helping to filter REAL news away from those citizens. Any country that wants to filter the Internet (an on-demand communications tool at its core) has something it wishes to hide from those citizens. If the United States is truly as supportive of open and transparent government as we say we are (and I'm guardedly optimistic about our commitment) we would press criminal charges against companies that comport themselves in this manner.
Unless, of course, you and a bunch of your buddies (from the fifty states) either petition the government for redress of grievances (provided for in the constitution) or organize a constitutional convention (also provided for). The rules are, like most other things in the constitution, left vague, but citizens can practice issue/constitutional advocacy on their own. Whether or not the government would recognize these types of actions as legitimate is up for grabs; if enough people were involved it would make political sense to pay attention; however, if enough people were that fed up, it would already have been dealt with by congress. Right now, our only way to really get issues decided as the people want them is to get on TV somehow, piss a whole lot of people off and in doing so, get congress involved. If it's against corporate interests, that may not even be enough.
So what's that all mean? Democracy, as we think we know it in the US, is a joke. That much was proved by the wonderful election of 2000. If an honest accounting of the votes can be stopped by an appointed judicial panel (who are completely unaccountable, especially since the serve life terms), then we're not living in any type of democracy. Corporate control of representative bodies also shows us what's really going on. On top of that Herr Ashcroft and Mein Fuhrer Bush are doing the best they can to dismantle whatever protections the Constitution had for our personal liberties. Frankly, I'm not too impressed with anything the US does anymore. We can't even keep our constitution sacred, so all our high-minded principles pretty much mean turd anyways.
Worst part is, I love America and everything it stands for. I just detest this country, because evil men have ruined what was great about it.
To change a law in the court system, a person must demonstrate actual harm; that is, unnecessary or unconstitutional government action necessary to apply a law. To change it in the legislature, one must have millions of dollars, strong connections to established corporations and industries, and possibly dirt on one or more senators/congressmen. For the average guy, changing the law is either impossible or so difficult as to be for all intents and purposes impossible. Any more questions about our fscked up system over here?
One atrocity committed by the American government... Hmm... It's hard to pick just one. How about only those that most people here will remember well (at least from history, considering primacy effects and all that). How about Dresden (firebombing innocent civilians en masse, killing more than Hiroshima or Nagasaki) or hell; how bout Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How about the internment of people of Japanese origin? While I appreciate your cunningly crafted troll (considering this IS slashdot, and most of us seem to have it in the for the US gov't), I can't just sit idly by. The United States has committed plenty of atrocities, especially against the Native Americans (our westward expansion could easily be labeled "ethnic cleansing") and this sort of revisionist history is really damaging. Okay. Enough lookin like an idiot answering trolls for now.
I used to go to slashdot to get information that wasn't available elsewhere; I don't if it's just because today is a slow tech news day or whatever, but posting stuff that's been on CNN or MSNBC's webpage for so long they no longer keep it on the front page doesn't make slashdot look very important. Why copy their stories? There's gotta be better content out there.
that quote you referenced in it's entirety is:
"They that can give up essential liberties to obtain a little temporal safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"
~Benjamin Franklin
*just thought I'd give it up; a great counter to the whole "the constitution is not a suicide pact" argument offered by our anti-personal liberties gov't.
I was a Mac user until my 18th birthday. As a result, I had never installed a card/processor/anything in my box. When I got my PC, I immediately took a look and thought "gee, that'd be easy to build." Within a year I built my own PC. Ikea furniture, on the other hand, still eludes me at times. On the whole, computer components these days are pretty user-friendly; however, the assumption that installing memory/processors/upgrade cards protects an industry not unlike the auto repair business; unskilled jobs for people who don't mind doing repetitive, boring tasks that generally are not clean or safe and most definetly do not involve a desk. Go to your local Best Buy, and they'll do all the work on your computer for you, charging exboritant rates for work done by a technician paid a little more than minimum wage. The company gets a huge profit, the user continues to feel incapable of working on their computer, and a new industry is created. If everybody built their computer at home, this whole thing wouldn't be possible.
Home-built may be best, but it's only best when everyone understands the technology. The interesting thing about the information age is it's the first age in human technology where the vast majority of the technology consuming public has NO understanding of the technology they use. As a result, service industries like mechanics and computer technicians form an important part of our economy. I don't know whether we should arrest this trend or not; on one hand, it promises high-paying jobs and status upon those who understand the technology; but on the other hand, it limits innovation only to those who are in the know. In the case of the internal combustion engine, we should be able to see (from the lack of design progress over the last 100 years) that this type of thing leads to stagnation. The computing revolution shouldn't be leaving so many people out, but instead of including the general public, the comupting people (/. included) has left the general public out. The masses at the gates need to know more, if for any reason, then because they'll support open source more fully if they REALLY understand why it is a better solution. If we leave the masses at the gate, they'll eventually become disinterested and treat computers like they do their cars. I don't want to see what that kind of lack of interest will do to our information technology systems; the roads are bad enough that the very prospect is horrifying. If you think I'm wrong realize that the best plans and projections helped design the roads in the United States, and even with that information available, the roads suck. Without an informed, interested Internet public, we'll see the same kinds of problems cropping up again.
But, of course, this is all conjecture. If anybody is interested, of course let me know what you think.
The problem is that belief in a monetary reward has become the prime reason for scientific progres, and that's just crazy. Money is not and has never been real; however, because a government many of us do not trust (for good reason in some cases) says that money has value we accept it like sheep. I'm a college student, and I realize how challenging some courses can be, but just because I've spent 4 years learning doesn't mean I have an intrinsic right to a better life than anyone else; however, our "classless" society will pretty much guarantee that for me. The main problem is that we've suborned the PRINCIPLE of doing the right thing for the alimghty buck. Remember this; the largest portion of human existence was egalitarian society where bands of humans lived together and helped each other for mutual survival. It's in our nature to look after each other, so why can't we just do it?